Sarah Palin continues to prove herself a master of political Jiu-Jitsu.
Palin’s statement causes Gore to respond. Since Gore is responding the networks cover it and are forced to cover the climategate issue, even to discount it, but Palin also throws back:
Former Vice President Gore also claimed today that the scientific community has worked on this issue for 20 years, and therefore it is settled science. Well, the Climategate scandal involves the leading experts in this field, and if Climategate is proof of the larger method used over the past 20 years, then Vice President Gore seriously needs to consider that their findings are flawed, falsified, or inconclusive.
Vice President Gore, the Climategate scandal exists. You might even say that it’s sort of like gravity: you simply can’t deny it.
and the networks (like Morning Joe this morning) cover that too.
The end result of all of this will be people’s exposure to the evidence, this can’t but hurt the Climate change cult as thread after thread that defends the “decline hiders” turns into rebuttal from normally reliable readers.
Most importantly while the usual suspects cry foul, fair people on the other side are asking probing questions about the data.
The worm is turning and their fear is palatable. When Palin can go toe to toe with as seasoned a pol as a former congressman, Senator and 2 term Vice president from a political family and come out not only ahead but standing the left has to be shaking.
Exit Question: Is it a coincidence that one person in this debate is making public appearances all over the country, while the other ducks public forums?
Da Techguy's (no longer backup) Blog 
does anyone really believe Palin wrote the op-ec piece on her own.
come on get real Palin is a empty head that repeats what her handlers tell her to.
Keep telling yourself that it will give you comfort.
Are you kidding me, Al Gore has more intelligence in his little finger and more class than the bulldog with lipstick.
She flip -flops and blows whatever direction the righ-wing tells her
Palin is a fascinating political phenomenon. The Left seem obsessed with her. Why? Perhaps it is because she has become the shadow president. Just as President Obama uses the “bully pulpit” of the presidency to rouse people to support or oppose causes, shadow president Palin is able to use the “bully pulpit” of Facebook to rally people. Watch what she is doing–she is showing what an alternative to President Obama looks like. She compliments him when he does things right and criticizes him when she thinks he does things wrong, essentially telling the public how she would act as a president. If you think of her as just a private citizen, the hostility of the Left makes no sense. If you think of her as the shadow president, the hostility of the Left is not at all surprising.
I don’t doubt Al Gore has intelligence, he has managed to get very rich off of this fearmongering, that shows plenty of intelligence.
Or to put it another way, I’m sure Al Gore is an intelligent man, and an educated man, but take me and my father. I have a degree in Computer Science and a Minor in US history. My Father dropped out of school in the 6th grade to support his family in the depression. If a third party had to take either my advice or his there would be no contest, he was one of the wisest men I’ve ever known and did great things with what he had, not only for himself but for others.
Sarah Palin started with none of Gore’s advantages and has done plenty of things with them. The Vice President can be proud of his career but I think with respect Jack that a person who is insulting a lady has little business discussing who has class and who doesn’t.
Maybe we can find a controlling legal authority to decide?
As a Pol a bit of hostility to her positions and some snark is to be expected, after all if you are going to enter the ring you have to be willing to take a few punches. And there have been times when her defenders have been too thin skinned.
But the left’s obsession and pure hatred of her boarders on psychosis. It’s not just because she is a “Shadow President” (an intriguing idea btw) but because of who and what she is.
She is more authentic than any candidate of the left and certainly more so than our current president. It is her very existence, who she is. that gives the lie to much of the left’s pre-conceived notions and assumptions that they have sold themselves on and plan to sell to others.
Some people can’t handle it, it’s much like the Climategate stuff, when reality hits you in the face you can acknowledge it or scream.
When the left can counter her rationally and/or when they ignore her like the irrelevant person they claim she is, then I’ll give her opponents more respect.
[…] autobiography Man of the House (that even now R. C. Lane and other liberals are checking to determine who actually wrote it.) page 108. The Scene JFK’s Inauguration: On the aisle was George Kara whom we used to call […]
…And the photographs of the arctic and antarctic shelfs are…caused by dolphins melting the glaciers with sonic blasts to cool water for their underwater martinis? Kilimanjaro is…natives building massive campfires around a 12,000 year-old glacier? Wait! I know! Errant microwaves from mis-focused cell towers are causing the glaciers to melt! Yeah, that’s it! Its all cell towers. Environment is same as its always been. Know wait! They DOCTORED the photos. The melting glaciers are a digitally re-touched conspiracy!
Snark vs data.
When you have the data on your side you don’t have to hide it or alter it, when you have the science on your side you don’t have to shut down other voices. When you have a good argument you don’t have to turn off the mike.
But I admire a man who stands behind his religion.
“Climategate” started out when there appeared on the Internet a collection of e-mails of a group of climatologists who work in the University of East Anglia in England. These documents reveal that some climatologists of international preeminence have manipulated the data of their investigations and have strongly tried to discredit climatologists who are not convinced that the increasing quantities of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere are the cause of global warming.
It is true that a majority of the scientists who study climatic tendencies in our atmosphere have arrived at the conclusion that the world’s climate is changing, and they have convinced a group of politicians, some of whom are politically powerful, of the truth of their conclusions.
A minority, however, is skeptical. Some believe that recent data that suggest that the average temperature of the atmosphere is going up can be explained by natural variations in solar radiation and that global warming is a temporary phenomenon. Others believe that the historical evidence indicating that the temperature of the atmosphere is going up at a dangerous rate is simply not reliable.
Such lacks of agreement are common in the sciences. They are reduced and eventually eliminated with the accumulation of new evidence and of more refined theories or even by completely new ones. Such debates can persist for a period of decades. Academics often throw invective at one another in these debates. But typically this does not mean much.
But the case of climate change is different. If the evidence indicates that global warming is progressive, is caused principally by our industrial processes, and will probably cause disastrous changes in our atmosphere before the end of the twenty-first century, then we do not have the time to verify precisely if this evidence is reliable. Such a process would be a question of many years of new investigations. And if the alarmist climatologists are right, such a delay would be tragic for all humanity.
The difficulty is that economic and climatologic systems are very complicated. They are not like celestial mechanics, which involves only the interaction of gravity and centrifugal force, and efforts to construct computerized models to describe these complicated systems simply cannot include all the factors that are influential in the evolution of these complicated systems.
All this does not necessarily indicate that the alarmist climatologists are not right. But it really means that if global warming is occurring, we cannot know exactly what will be the average temperature of our atmosphere in the year 2100 and what will be the average sea level of the world’s ocean in that year.
It also means that we cannot be confident that efforts by the industrialized countries to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere will have a significant influence on the evolution of the world’s climate.
Alas, the reduction of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere would be very costly and would greatly change the lives of all the inhabitants of our planet–with the possibility (perhaps even the probability!) that all these efforts will be completely useless.
Harleigh Kyson Jr.
Very well thought out response!
[…] highlights the importance of Sarah Palin. The Palin Gore exchange forced media such as MSNBC to at least acknowledge the […]